Let us not lose hope in democracy by focusing solely on what is happening today. Let us remember what it is capable of

There is a very simple way to convince yourself that democracy is on the brink of collapse: just look at what is happening today. Consider populism, polarisation, increasingly vicious election campaigns, foreign interference, lies amplified by social media, and artificial intelligence used to fabricate credible fakes. The picture seems inevitable: open societies are weak, under siege, and unable to defend themselves. The Economist deserves credit for suggesting a different and far more useful exercise: before we despair, let us try to remember. Western democracies have faced times when the threat to their institutions did not consist of an aggressive social media post or a piece of fake news. It consisted of bombs, kidnappings, murders and attacks aimed at crippling people. It consisted of armed organisations that openly declared their intention to overthrow the democratic state.

Italians should know this better than anyone. During the ‘Years of Lead’, as The Economist recalls, far-right and far-left groups carried out thousands of acts of violence. Aldo Moro was kidnapped, put on trial and murdered by the Red Brigades. And there was often a grey area surrounding terrorism, where people were willing to find justifications for those who regarded bourgeois democracy as a sham to be overthrown. It was not just Italy: Germany had the RAF, Spain the ETA, the United Kingdom the IRA, and Greece the 17 November group. Yet democracies held firm. Not because they were perfect or immune to fear, but because they possessed a characteristic that authoritarian regimes lack: the ability to absorb conflict without being forced to eradicate it.

Democracy serves to prevent every political conflict from turning into a civil war. It serves to transform anger into votes, protest into representation, and radicalism into parliamentary opposition. And it often works precisely when it seems to be failing.

The fact that extremist or populist parties make it to the ballot is not necessarily a sign that democracy is dying. On the contrary, it may be a sign that it is doing its job. It is far better to have a radical force that garners millions of votes, enters Parliament, governs, is held to account and perhaps defeated, than to have that same anger transformed into an underground movement that regards the ballot box as useless and arms as legitimate. Of course, complacency is unwise. Democracies can deteriorate, be hollowed out from within, manipulated, or elect leaders who attempt to change the rules so as never to lose again. The events in America on 6 January showed just how dangerous it can be to delegitimise an election.

But there is a huge difference between vigilance and despair. The former strengthens democracy. The latter weakens it. If we convince voters that our institutions are now powerless, that every election is the last one, we end up using the same language as the extremists. Open societies are noisy, contentious, imperfect and, at times, exasperating. Yet they have overcome fascism, terrorism, armed revolutions, economic crises, cold wars and waves of political violence. They have endured. That is why The Economist is right. We must remain vigilant, safeguard elections, counter interference and defend freedom of information. Let us not despair, then. And let us remember that, throughout the history of free societies, the ballot box has proven itself to be stronger than bullets far more often than we realise.